ERIC EJ1097758: Three Elements of Success: Attendance, Tutoring, and Advising

2007·0.11 MB·English

by  ERIC

Three Elements of Success:
Attendance, Tutoring,
and Advising
Described as “tough love,” Louisiana State
University at Eunice’s Pathways to Success
program experienced success in its first two
years by implementing mandatory placement,
PAUL FOWLER
attendance, tutoring, and advising policies.
LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY
Selected student successes and retention data
AT EUNICE
are discussed, along with policies and some
practical advice for developmental educators at
other institutions who might wish to implement
a similar program.
The need for and growth in developmental education has been well
documented. In fact, between 40 percent and 63 percent of the students
attending two-year institutions in the United States require developmental
instruction in at least one subject (Kirst & Venezia, 2006; McCabe,
2000; Pollock, 2006; Schmidt, 2006). The Louisiana State University
at Eunice (LSUE), an open-access public two-year institution of
approximately 2,900 students, encounters many of the same issues faced
by most higher education institutions including an increasing number
of students requiring developmental education, students working while
attending classes, and an increasing number of first generation college
students. However, these issues have strained the institution’s ability to
deal with the reality of the situation given the high poverty rates and low
high school graduation rates indicative of the area (Bishaw & Iceland,
2003; U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2005; U.S. Department of Education,
2006). For example, since developmental students could previously enroll
themselves in classes after an initial meeting with their advisor, they
would often enroll in classes for which they were not prepared, set up
class schedules that were too demanding by scheduling all classes back to
back, attempt a full-time course load while working full-time, and avoid
tutoring and advising. In addition, even though the attendance policy
stated that attendance for every class was expected, very little follow
up occurred when students did not show up for class. Eventually, of
course, students found themselves on academic probation and ineligible
NADE Digest, 3 (1), Spring 2007 29
30 Three Elements of Success
for financial aid. Frankly, little was in place to assist students before they
experienced difficulties, and institutional officials struggled to combat
these types of issues. Consequently, campus leaders decided to address the
situation head on by asking: How can we deal with the developmental
education issue while increasing student success?
QUALITY ENHANCEMENT PLAN AND PATHWAYS TO SUCCESS
LSUE responded to this question by creating an institution-wide
committee and by writing a Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) in order
to renew its accreditation with the Southern Association of Colleges
and Schools (Quality Enhancement Plan Committee, 2003). The QEP,
entitled Pathways to Success: An Enhanced Educational Experience is
based on Boylan’s (2002) What Works: Research-Based Best Practices in
Developmental Education. The end result of the report and accreditation
efforts was the creation of a centralized Office of Developmental
Education in July 2004. Described as “tough love”, the Pathways to Success
program provides a structured learning environment that treats the
“whole student” through academics, advising, monitoring of attendance,
and support services. Students are automatically placed in the program if
their ACT composite is 15 or less or if they have no ACT scores.
Once admitted, students are required to attend a one-day orientation
covering everything from general LSUE procedures to detailed
information on the Pathways to Success program. Each student sits down
one-on-one with a Pathways advisor who then creates a personalized
schedule for the student prior to the student leaving. Students are not
permitted to enroll themselves for classes and actually have very little
choice in the classes they may take. In addition, students in the program
may take no more than four classes per semester and every effort is
made to accommodate a student’s work or personal schedule within
limitations. For example, full-time students may take classes on Monday,
Wednesday, and Friday, but only if they are willing to attend from eight
or nine in the morning to two or three in the afternoon. Study, tutoring,
and lunch breaks are built into the schedule by spreading out a student’s
classes throughout the day. Students may also attend classes five days per
week which allows a student to leave campus before noon on most days;
however, study and convenience breaks are still built into the schedule.
First semester full-time students are not permitted to take courses on
Tuesday and Thursday only because this requires a student to be in class
from eight in the morning through two in the afternoon with no breaks.
NADE Digest, 3 (1), Spring 2007 31
Second semester students may take classes on a Tuesday Thursday
schedule if high grades were obtained in the first semester.
At first, many students complained vehemently about the guidelines and
scheduling requirements; however, most students have begun to believe
that they need the extra help with becoming an adult and managing
their time, as well as additional tutoring designed to address academic
weaknesses. For example, two traditional-aged students who recently
attended orientation concealed their ACT scores with a composite of 16
when they learned they would not have the same support structure since
their ACT scores placed them out of the program. Institutional leaders
have also seen an increase in the numbers of students who do not wish to
take the math placement test simply because they realize they need some
extra help and want to start at the beginning to ensure success in college.
Finally, a few nontraditional students have also asked to be placed into
the program due to its structure.
STUDENT ATTENDANCE
Students sign a “Contract for Success” that acknowledges their
participation in orientation and their acceptance of the three key
program guidelines: attendance, advising, and tutoring. First, students
must attend class. Attendance for the Pathways to Success program
is defined as being present from the time class is scheduled to begin
until it is scheduled to end. Students who come in after the scheduled
starting time or leave prior to the scheduled ending time can, at the
discretion of the faculty member, be counted as absent. Students are
required to attend 90 percent of their developmental courses, meaning
that any student may miss approximately one full week of classes with no
penalty. At orientation, students are informed that there are no excused
absences and that they are to be in class when they are scheduled to be in
class. Very simply, doctor’s appointments, caring for children, and other
personal business should be conducted on their own time. Students who
violate the attendance policy automatically fail the course and are sent an
appeal letter both through standard mail and electronic mail to protect
their due process rights. Students must then meet with the Director of
Developmental Education and present appropriate documentation to
explain why they were not in class in order to appeal the failing grade.
Appeals can be decided in any number of ways including consulting
the faculty member for an opinion since the faculty member typically
32 Three Elements of Success
knows the student better academically. Providing documentation, how-
ever, does not automatically guarantee the student will be reinstated to
good standing in the class. Each case is decided on an individual basis
by the program director and faculty member; the director then notifies
the faculty member and student of the final decision via electronic mail.
Students who fail to contact the director prior to the deadline date stated
on the absence appeal automatically fail the course. The rigid attendance
policy worked so well that the students now rarely miss days in general
education classes where the attendance policy is not enforced.
TUTORING
Next, students must attend tutoring sessions with a faculty member
or peer tutor. Tutoring forms mandating extra assistance for students are
filled out and turned in to the departmental office when a student receives
below a 70 percent or C- on a major assignment such as a test or major
paper. The definition of a major assignment rests with the faculty in each
department; faculty, if they wish, may also begin referring students to
tutoring on the basis of quiz grades. Faculty members from the program
tutor students on a first-come first-served drop-in basis approximately
four hours a day while peer tutoring uses a Supplemental Instruction
model requiring appointments and a formalized scheduling method.
The Office of Developmental Education then tracks student tutoring by
checking logs of both tutoring facilities weekly. Feedback is sent to the
faculty via electronic mail regarding students’ participation in tutoring.
Students also have the opportunity to use web-based electronic
tutoring and digital video-tutor compact discs that come with the
English composition and mathematics textbooks, which permits
students the flexibility to be tutored at any time of the day or night
if they have a computer at home that meets the textbook publishers’
operating requirements. Students who use the face-to-face tutoring
labs far outnumber the students who use the computerized tutoring
since some students do not have computers or a high speed Internet
connection at home. In addition, many students have difficulty down-
loading appropriate plug-ins and navigating the web based programs.
ADVISING
Students enrolled in the program must see their academic advisors
at least three times per semester. These visits are mandated by the
NADE Digest, 3 (1), Spring 2007 33
Contract for Success that students sign at orientation and by the syllabi
in the Strategies to Success and College Reading courses. To meet this
requirement, two full-time advisors were hired for the program in spring
2005. In addition, one to three faculty from each division act as advisors
for the Pathways to Success students and are trained by the director and
two full-time advisors. University personnel make a conscious effort to
build a relationship with the students during these visits, many times
this involves explaining why the program guidelines are so rigid and the
options are so limited.
Typically, during the first three weeks of the semester, the full-time
advisors and the director are notified if a student is close to violating the
attendance policy, not completing course work, not attending tutoring,
or lacks the required materials for class. Students may be electronically
mailed through their university account, called at home, called on
their cell phone, stopped in the hall, pulled out of class, or visited at
the campus housing facility to discuss the matter at hand. Most of the
students, of course, believe that they are being hassled if this happens to
them, but it is all part of a concentrated effort to keep students on track
and attending class while continuously shaping their behavior so they are
successful in their first year of college.
DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
In fall 2005, LSUE had a total of 2,954 students composed of 71
percent women and 19 percent men with an average age of 25. The ethnic
makeup of the general student population was 71 percent Caucasian and
29 percent minority with 25 percent of the minority population being
African American. Fifty-eight percent of the student body was full-time
and just over 7 percent of them lived on campus. Pathways to Success
had a total of 334 students composed of 76 percent women and 24 per-
cent men with an average age of 23. Ethnic makeup of the group was
43 percent Caucasian and 57 percent minority with African Americans
making up 54 percent of the minority subgroup. Eighty percent of the
Pathways students were enrolled full-time.
IMMEDIATE RESULTS OF “TOUGH LOVE”
Within a few weeks of the first full semester in fall 2004, faculty began
noticing that students were attending class and completing the course
work. In fact, faculty believed that there was an immediate increase in
student success during the first semester. However, since the program
34 Three Elements of Success
was new, the director had no data to prove the speculation made by the
faculty. As a result, the director began examining every piece of data on
students with similar ACT composite scores as far back as the computer
records would allow.
In essence, by taking a “tough love” attitude and mandating placement
and course sequencing, rigidly enforcing the attendance policy, hiring
two full-time advisors, enforcing the advising mandates, and mandating
tutoring, success rates in the Strategies for Success course increased
from 13 percent to 70 percent while the success rates for college reading
increased from 63 percent to 74 percent in one year. The success rate
for developmental English composition increased from 65 percent
to 70 percent in two years. Students’ academic standing results were
also examined for the first time in spring 2005. In just one year, the
percentage of Pathway students in good academic standing (grade point
average at or above 2.00) increased from 56 percent to 61 percent while
the percentage of students placed on academic probation decreased from
40 percent to 17 percent. These results were duplicated at the end of the
second year in spring 2006 when the percentage of students in good
standing increased an additional 10 percent to 71 percent and those
placed on academic probation decreased an additional 4 percent to 13
percent.
In addition, fall 2004 to spring 2005 retention for first time freshman
students in the program increased from 63 percent to 75 percent in the
first year and then another 4 percent the second year. Fall 2004 to fall
2005 retention data for first-time students was also analyzed and found
to have increased from 30 percent to 49 percent. Three other results
from the first two years were found to be equally interesting. The first
was that the percentage of absence appeals based on the total number
of students decreased by 3 percent. This decrease was rather surprising
considering nine percent of the students enrolled in the program lived
in areas that were devastated or had major damage from Hurricane
Rita. Second, the percentage of students seeing their advisor continued
to increase. For example, 88 percent of the students complied with the
advising guideline in fall 2004 while 93 percent of the students com-
plied in spring 2006. Lastly, efforts to enforce the tutoring requirements
have also increased the percentage of students attending tutoring when
assigned. Data indicated that only 16 percent of the students attended
NADE Digest, 3 (1), Spring 2007 35
their assigned tutoring in fall 2004 while 53 percent sought the required
tutoring in spring 2006.
DISCUSSION
The Pathways to Success program at LSUE began to have an impact on
students and faculty the first semester it was established. In fact, some
faculty and staff began referring to the director as the “principal.” Since
the program is a highly structured bridge program for those students who
need some extra support and guidance, the term “principal” is probably
appropriate. Additionally, even those who initially criticized the program
have been astounded by the results. It has taken the efforts of the entire
campus community to make the first two years of the program a success,
especially the faculty and advisors who work with the students on a daily
basis.
Most of the faculty members supported the program immediately
even though Pathways created more work for them. First, the program
increased their paperwork load. Advising, tutoring, and absence forms
were created in order to monitor compliance with program guidelines.
The second major impact to the faculty was an increased emphasis on
instructional pedagogy for developmental students. A major training
session for faculty is held on campus every semester covering such issues
as the characteristics of developmental students, appropriate instructional
methods, and procedural issues. Very simply, the willingness of the
campus community to work collaboratively has spurred the success of
the program.
Even with the enormous help of all involved, it is still difficult to
keep up with routine matters during student registration, new student
orientation, and the beginning and end of each semester. The three full-
time staff members often have lines out the doors even though students
are encouraged to make appointments. Despite this, students seem to
understand that the majority of the faculty and staff care about them,
are paying attention to their needs, and want them to succeed in their
educational and life goals. This awareness was apparent by the results
on an exit survey given to the students in their final university studies
course. For instance, 89 percent of the students either agreed or strongly
agreed with the statement that LSUE helps students be successful in
school while 92 percent agreed or strongly agreed that their instructors
wanted them to succeed. In addition, 80 percent of the students agreed
36 Three Elements of Success
or strongly agreed that their instructors taught in a way they could
understand while 78 percent of the students agreed or strongly agreed
that the orientation helped them understand the details of the program.
As one might expect, only 33 percent of the students thought that the
attendance policy was fair in the first year of the program; however,
nearly two-thirds (62 percent) agreed or strongly agreed with it at the
end of the second year.
CONCLUSIONS
While the Pathways to Success program at LSUE may be viewed by
some to be overly restrictive and inflexible, the program has produced
amazing results in just a short time as shown by the increase in success
rates and overall retention rates. Additionally, despite criticism, the
program does follow research best practices by providing a very
structured environment while attending to students’ educational needs,
building relationships with students so they feel that faculty and staff
care about them, and demanding that students take coursework that
progresses toward a degree or certificate in order to meet their life long
goals (Boylan, 2002; McCabe, 2000; Stewart, Brewer, & Brown Wright,
2006; Tinto, 2004).
As one might expect, there is one caveat. A program of this type is
not for all institutions. Developmental educators and institutional
leadership should evaluate their positions on the topics discussed in
this paper before embarking on a plan to implement a similar program.
For instance, student guidelines must not change midstream and the
executive leadership should not override the director’s decisions unless
a legal issue exists or there has been a clear violation of due process.
Constant communication is a must since all constituencies involved
must work collaboratively in order to strive for increased student success.
LSUE’s program director reports to the Vice Chancellor for Academic
Affairs so communication may remain open with the faculty through
the academic division heads. This also maintains the rigor and academic
excellence desired by establishing two-way communication and
frequently involves discussions about what is not working to the benefit
of the students. Student expectations in the first college level courses
are also communicated to developmental educators in this manner,
so communication with the senior academic officer, division heads, or
deans, and faculty is imperative.
NADE Digest, 3 (1), Spring 2007 37
Next, institutional leaders should consider whether they believe an
enrollment decline will result due to the implementation of a similar
program. While LSUE has seen enrollment fluctuations since the Pathways
to Success program was implemented, the enrollment fluctuations have
been across all segments of the student population and may actually
reflect the low unemployment rate in the area (U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 2006). In addition, institutional officials believe that high fuel
costs and the rebuilding efforts due to the 2005 hurricanes in the area
have also impacted the LSUE’s enrollment. The program director and
Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs meet regularly to examine possible
impacts to the student population due to changing policies as the Path-
ways to Success program is implemented.
In addition, the developmental education office must collaborate and
work as a team with faculty and staff. First, constant communication and
collaboration with the Admissions Office and Registrar’s Office are of the
utmost importance. Included is an open dialogue with the clerical staff as
well since they are often the first people a student encounters face-to-face
at the institution. Clerical staff often alerts the director and Registrar to
possible logistical problems as new policies are implemented.
Lastly, working as a team using communication and collaboration
also means that faculty will not shout “academic freedom” at every
opportunity, but faces change with a positive outlook toward improving
instruction. Conversely, developmental education personnel must also
respect the wishes of the faculty; however, both groups must keep in mind
that the focus should be toward increasing student performance. The
student success rates and the overall attitude at LSUE indicate that most
involved do just that. Consensus is reached and then change is integrated
incrementally in order to work toward more effective instruction for a
diverse population. The bottom line is that there are many individual
voices synergistically creating a single collaborative voice shouting one
goal in harmony—do what is best for the students.
________________________________________
REFERENCES
Bishaw, A., & Iceland, J. (2003, May). Poverty: 1999 Census 2000 Brief.
Washington, D.C: U.S. Census Bureau.
Boylan, H. R. (2002). What works: Research-based best practices in developmental
education. Boone, NC: Continuous Quality Improvement Network/
National Center for Developmental Education.
38 Three Elements of Success
Kirst, M. W., & Venezia, A. (2006). What states must do: Our educational
system is letting too many young people fall through the cracks. School and
College: A Special Report from The Chronicle of Higher Education, 52(27),
p.B36-B37.
McCabe, R. H. (2000). No One to Waste: A Report to Public Decision-Makers
and Community College Leaders. Washington D.C: Community College
Press.
Pollock, K. (2006, May). Enrollment management in community colleges.
AACRAO-SEM Newsletter. Retrieved May 23, 2006 from http://www.
aacrao.org/sem/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3160
Quality Enhancement Plan Committee (2003). Pathways to Success: An
Enhanced Educational Experience. Eunice, LA: Louisiana State University
at Eunice.
Schmidt, P. (2006). Powerful forces draw academe into the fray. School and
College: A Special Report from the Chronicle of Higher Education, 52(27),
B4-B5.
Stewart, G., Brewer, G., & Brown Wright, D. (2006). Student services support
of developmental education. NADE Digest, 2(1), 21-27.
Tinto, V. (2004). Student Retention and Graduation: Facing the Truth, Living
with the Consequences. Washington, D.C: The Pell Institute for the Study
on Opportunity in Higher Education.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2006, September 12). Local area unemployment
statistics. Retrieved on September 12, 2006 from http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/
outside.jsp?survey=la
U.S. Bureau of the Census. (2005, December 14). Current population survey,
Annual social and economic supplement. Retrieved on June 14, 2006 from
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/histpov/hstpov19.html
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
(2006). The Condition of Education 2006, NCES 2006-071. Washington,
DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
________________________________________
Paul Fowler has an earned Ph.D. in higher education administration from Kent
State University and has been involved with developmental education since 1987.
He joined Louisiana State University at Eunice in summer 2004 as the Director of
Developmental Education to oversee the new Pathways to Success program after
spending 20 years at the University of Akron in Akron, Ohio. He has presented on
various topics related to developmental education including the use of technology in
the mathematics classroom, advising, and the 2005 hurricane season’s impact on
LSUE’s Pathways to Success. You may contact him at [email protected].